Should the Commissioner of Taxation resign?
Posted by John, March 23rd, 2009 - under ATO, CPSU, Commissioner of Taxation, Community and Public Sector Union, Privacy, Public Service, Tax, Tax Office.
If Michael D’Ascenzo, the Commissioner of Taxation in Australia, were to reveal details about a taxpayer’s affairs he would resign or be forced to resign.
Indeed the Tax Office takes its responsibilities so strictly that unauthorised access to taxpayers’ records by ATO staff will see various sanctions imposed, up to and including the sack.
Yet this cone of silence apparently does not apply to discussing former employees. Here is what the Commissioner said about me in an interview last week with Il Globo recently.
A former assistant commissioner, John Passant, recently described the office as dominated by people who were too old and hostage to a “detail fetish” where they should be thinking big. “Why do you think John’s a former assistant commissioner?”, D’Ascenzo asks abruptly. So, there’s no gap in the ATO’s ability to plan for the challenges of tomorrow? “No.” Simple as that.
Me thinks Michael was annoyed and when he gets cranky he can snap without thinking things through. (One hint for ATO staff and others: a risky but sometimes rewarding tactic can be to provoke him.)
Anyway, I’m not quite sure what Michael meant, but it hangs in the air like a bad smell, doesn’t it?
Presumably I was too old at 54. I agree – I had been aged by the constant narrow minded crap that passes for leadership in the ATO.
How many audits/rulings/phone calls [fill in the appropriate activity] have you mere underlings done today? Is that all? Do more.
It was Peter Shergold, former head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet,who said that an organisation obsessed with process was moribund. The ATO is obsessed with process.
As Lenin discovered Taylorism is a complete disaster when used to manage workers. Far better outcomes arise when you create an environment of inclusiveness and democratic decision making.
As to vision – hmmm… It was Paul Keating who said that John Howard had all the vision of Mr Magoo.
The ATO is very much a John Howard organisation.
As my former employer the Commissioner knows my circumstances – age, name, serial number etc. But why is that appropriate for public consumption and debate?
And why try to rebut my arguments with ad hominem attacks?
Actually Michael’s response just reinforces my point – the ATO values diversity as long as you don’t disagree with the Dear Leader and his courtiers.
If I were the CPSU – the public servants’ union – I’d be worried about this. What are the boundaries when an employer reveals details about employees and former employees? Do employees and former employees have a right to privacy?
I don’t think the Commissioner should resign. I am just a shit kicker, not a multi-national with access to the Commissioner and the Prime Minister or other people temporarily in positions of power. So my position is one of powerlessness.
But even in our undemocratic society the propaganda is that positions of power flow ultimately from shit kickers like me.
Michael’s actions in positioning the ATO to deal with the Great Recession will allow us to make a real judgement of his character and leadership.
Let history judge him.
Advertisement
Comments
Comment from John
Time March 23, 2009 at 9:27 pm
juan
MDA is not mediocre. He is quite clever but trapped within ATO group think.
He didn’t rise to power because of shit kickers like me. My vision of a democratic workplace allows only of a very different route to ‘the top’ and then only with the ongoing agreement of those who put you there.
I was probably one of the charlatans you talk about. I don’t think that is the right word. There are lots of well meaning people at senior levels whose whole training and world view doesn’t allow them to contemplate doing things differently. Men and women make history but not of their own making (or words to that effect.)
Actually MDA does try to socialise with staff. But that doesn’t stop him being driven by the logic of capitalism to administer the organisation in ways that impose and reinforce that logic.
Comment from juan
Time March 24, 2009 at 8:39 am
Exactly, John, ‘He is quite clever…’ So are, or were, those running Wall St. Look where they got us. No, you weren’t one of the charlatans. You were too vociferous, hardworking and agro to be involved in charlatanry. I am referring precisely to the ‘well meaning people (at senior levels) whose whole training and world view doesn’t allow them to contemplate doing things differently’. Don’t they have a moral obligation to break from their shackles? If they can make history they should also be able to tell right and wrong and take a stand. You did.
Comment from John
Time March 24, 2009 at 7:35 pm
juan
Thanks.
As to vociferous some might say empty vessels make the most sound. And it didn’t get me anywhere in defending International from the Potato Head razor gang.
Perhaps I wasn’t loud enough. But then again the powers in the ATO were deaf to our rational arguments.
I can only hope that international compliance is still OK, although I suspect it is not, in part because of the destruction of International as an adequately funded area with a clearly articulated vision and goal.
And that is just one area of the ATO.
Comment from juan
Time March 24, 2009 at 10:54 pm
John, the ATO was, and hopefully still is, staffed by highly qualified and intelligent people committed to their jobs and, certainly, their careers. If we cannot get those workers to think outside the square once in a while, what hope is there for the ‘revolution’. I think we should concentrate on the factory workers. But… wait a minute, they are voting liberal or labor or even NP. No, lets go back to the ATO and brow bit these fine officials into developing a working class conscience. We might not get anywhere but it would be a lot of fun. And in the process we might get ‘compliance’ into the newspaper front pages. But… wait a minute, why should any body worry about compliance? Only poor workers pay tax! Oh, this is getting boring…
Comment from John
Time March 25, 2009 at 6:04 am
juan
I agree. Concentrate on the workers in the ATO, not the bosses. Like most workers ATO staff have had little reason to question the system, but the global economic crisis is changing that to some extent.
We cannot hurry history. Workers must learn the lessons themselves. AT best lefties can only guide and make suggestions.
Interestingly the feedback I get from ATO staff splits down class lines – the bosses think I am mad, stupid, wrong etc.
ATO workers congratulate me for telling the truth.
Boring? Never! But let’s move on from my self indulgence.
Comment from peng
Time March 25, 2009 at 11:51 pm
Hi John
I can’t decide whether you are boring or not, but most recently your blog has been blocked in the ATO – the commissioner has decided that workers on the coalface should only hear his/her master’s voice.
Comment from John
Time March 26, 2009 at 5:40 am
Thanks Peng.
Boring? Moi?
Nice to know that my totally apolitical ATO articles are banned in the ATO.
Well, they are political in the sense that they criticise the anti-democratic nature of the public service and by extension all organisation in our society. Censorship is such a wonderful thing.
And again it reinforces my point – the ATO is anti-democratic, run from the top down by the Dear Leader and his courtiers.
Comment from juan
Time March 23, 2009 at 9:16 pm
John
I cannot sympathize with you on this one. Michael D’A is another mediocre bureaucrat (not compared to me, of course) who rose to the top thanks to shit kickers like you who allowed it to happen. I worked there briefly during the transition in the eighties and could see the charlatans coming to the fore. My last good memory of the ATO is walking to the Ainslie Club, across Commonwealth Bridge, from the ATO (it was then in the same building as the Finance and Treasury Offices) with a group of senior ATO officers, including the Commissioner himself! Do you see that happening today? Talk about workplace democracy.